Supporting Harm Reduction Programs

Data Storage

Below are all SHaRP resources related to data storage.

Brief Overview of Data Privacy & Security Considerations at Harm Reduction Programs

This document introduces issues data privacy and security considerations for SSPs and harm reduction programs, including the defining anonymous services and confidential services, a brief overview of HIPAA and covered entities, good practices for data privacy and security, considerations for linkage to care data, and considerations when reporting out data.

M&E toolkit

Manuscript: Facilitators and barriers to monitoring and evaluation at syringe services programs

This is an academic paper on facilitators and barriers to monitoring and evaluation at syringe services programs.

Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit: Data Collection Methods and Pilot Testing

The purpose of this guidance is to help syringe services programs (SSPs) and other harm reduction programs in establishing and maintaining data collection practices for program monitoring and evaluation. Programs may find this information useful if they have questions about the types of data they might collect, how they might record it, and how they might test out their methods with staff and participants. This guidance is part of a larger Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit for SSPs that will serve as a resource for programs in all stages of the monitoring and evaluation process.

Point in Time Survey (PiTS) Toolkit for Use at Syringe Services Programs

A Point in Time Survey (PiTS) allows a syringe services program (SSP) to ask a standardized set of questions from a portion of their clients, providing a snapshot of the population that the SSP serves. These surveys can be a quick and low-cost way to learn about the characteristics, needs, and service utilization patterns of their clients.

PiTS Toolkit: Analysis Phase

To help you implement your Point in Time Survey, this page contains tutorials to walk you through data cleaning and analysis using Excel. It also includes screen recordings demonstrating skills needed to clean and analyze survey data using Excel. And finally, there are resources for you to develop a data analysis plan and create a data table using Excel skills.

PiTS Toolkit: Implementation Phase

To support you as you implement your Point in Time Survey, this page contains brief presentations and resources to walk you through survey protocol development, interviewer training and interview guide development, incentive management, and data monitoring and quality assurance. And finally, there are screen recordings demonstrating skills needed to monitor survey data using Excel and REDCap.

Qualitative Data Quality at Harm Reduction Programs

 Qualitative data (e.g., staff notes, comments cards from participants, focus-group discussions, etc.) can play an important role in a syringe service program’s (SSPs) overall monitoring and evaluation strategy. Many programs have qualitative data they have amassed, but it is not clear what it could be used for. Whether you’re collecting new qualitative data, or analyzing pre-existing data, it’s important that the qualitative data you set out to use is comprehensible, detailed, and actionable. This webinar recording (September 19th, 2024) from the SHaRP team reviews and discusses common sources of qualitative data at SSPs, identifies some good practices for collecting qualitative data, and determines how to set an objective using and assess the quality of pre-existing qualitative data.

REDCap Basics for Syringe Services Programs

This is a short guide for harm reduction programs and syringe service programs (SSPs) considering using REDCap for their data collection and management. It reviews basic information about REDCap, strengths and challenges for use with SSPs, and the main ways to access REDCap. 

The SHaRP team has considerable experience using REDCap and working with organizations to build out REDCap systems. However, given the wealth, variety, and ongoing evolution of guidance on REDCap’s capabilities, this guide should not be considered comprehensive or airtight.  

Finally, this is not a promotion or endorsement of one particular company, software, or product by the Opioid Response Network (ORN), SAMHSA, or the SHaRP team. Further, this is not a recommendation of REDCap as the best software for SSP monitoring and evaluation. There is no one software solution that will work for all SSPs. Many complex factors figure into what software choices will work best for each individual program.

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide

The SSP Indicators Implementation Guide provides basic data points that a wide variety of SSPs could collect to monitor and evaluate their programs. This guide is focused on basic services and may not include some services that are becoming more common at SSPs. While this entire guide is likely useful for funders, government agencies, and others who require data from SSPs, the “Considerations for Funders” section is directly focused on recommendations for those who require these data.

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Background and Methods

This project came from conversations the SHaRP team regularly has with SSPs about good practices for data collection and which data to collect. This guide was informed by conversations with SSPs and funders, an analysis of state SSP data requirements, a convening with SSP staff, participants, and funders, and a workgroup and public share back that resulted from the convening.  

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Brief to Funders

One of the guiding principles of this toolkit is minimizing data collection wherever possible, to respect the autonomy of participants, and to minimize barriers to access services.  We acknowledge that harm reduction funders have rationale for collecting certain data from funding recipients, including facing their own requirements for specific data and a desire to evaluate their own efforts. However, disparate and potentially unethical requirements have a substantive impact on programs, and in particular, programs with relatively fewer resources.  The below resource includes some suggested considerations for funders of harm reduction services as they implement new or explore alternate methods for collecting data from funding recipients.

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Demographic Indicators

The domain “Demographics” refers to participant characteristics at an SSP. It includes the indicators “participant age range,” “participant gender,” and “participant race/ethnicity.”  

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Engagement with People Who Use Drugs Indicators

The domain “Engagement with People Who Use Drugs” refers to the ways that programs empower people who use drugs, include people who use drugs in decision-making, collect feedback from people who use drugs, and incorporate feedback in programming. This domain includes the indicators “how people who use drugs are engaged to give feedback about programs” and “how participants have decision making power in programs.”  

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Implementation Checklist

The checklist has been developed to help outline the steps required to begin implementing any of the suggested indicators in this guidance. Each phase of implementation includes steps and considerations for integrating the indicators into a program’s data collection system.   

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Overdose Prevention Indicators

The domain “Overdose Prevention” refers to the program services and activities directed towards preventing fatal overdose. It includes the indicators “count of naloxone doses distributed,” “participant overdose experience,” and “reported overdose reversals.”

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Service Coverage Indicators

At the population level, the domain “Service Coverage” may refer to the reach of a program in a geographic area. At the individual level, “Service Coverage” may refer to the level of engagement, level of services, or comprehensiveness of services provided to a participant. The indicators included in this domain are “hours per week a program operates,” “program’s service model(s),” and “total participant visits.” 

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Service Quality Indicators

The domain “Service Quality” refers to the effectiveness of services at improving the wellbeing and meeting the self-identified expectations of participants, staff, and volunteers. It includes the indicators “program activities” and “program needs and barriers to service provision.”  

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Structural Violence Indicators

The domain “Structural Violence” refers to the ways that local, regional, and national systems and institutions, including economic, political, cultural, and legal institutions, affect the lives and health of participants. This domain includes the indicators “participant housing status” and “participant interactions with law enforcement.”  

SSP Indicators Implementation Guide: Supply and Service Provision Indicators

The domain “Supply and Service Provision” refers to the services that a program provides and the supplies that a program distributes. The indicators included in this domain are “count of syringes distributed,” “types of services a program provides,” and “types of supplies a program distributes.”  

Using M&E to Better Serve Your Community: A Four-Part Webinar Series for Health Departments and SSPs in collaboration with the National Association of City and County Health Officials (NACCHO). 

These webinars, held over the course of 2021 and 2022 covered topics including client-centered models for M&E, statewide data systems, data dashboards for M&E, and the launch of the Point in Time Survey Toolkit.

Using Unique Identifiers Within Syringe Services Programs

This guide is intended for syringe services programs (SSPs) and SSP funders to support their understanding of data collection and monitoring. It provides an overview of the benefits and drawbacks of implementing unique identifiers (UID) as a method of data collection. The guide includes considerations for SSPs considering implementing a UID system and considerations for funders who are considering requiring individual-level data from grant recipients.